Gary Kline wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 02:34:29PM -0500, Chris wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >>> > > [[ ... ]] > >>> In my case this included leaning to think in 'Unix', and reaching an >>> understanding with (rather than of) regular expressions, sed, and awk. >>> >>> My workstation/laptop hardware does not really allow the option of >>> building things like KDE and OpenOffice, so I upgrade basically by >>> starting over with packages. I usually can do this in an hour or so. >>> When I first started, I found the differences between BSDI, FreeBSD, and >>> Linux confusing. Now mostly its more of an irritant than having to use >>> my son's mac to watch ESPN videos. > > > I've been experimenting with system tuning to get my slower > (400MHz) laptop and tower cases to run lots ffaster with X ... > and, obv'ly, lots slower for less important processes. As a > hard-core CLI type, I'd like to see lightweight apps like links > tied to a GUI version of mutt. Or something similarly > lightweight where you can click on a URL and have it instantiate > links. If you must-hae 3D, then Xaw-3D will do the magic. > .... > >> To me, this is where Ubuntu (I can't speak for other Linux distros) is >> the clear winner over FreeBSD on the desktop. Ubuntu is near >> out-of-the-box when it comes to media (audio/video/etc) of any sort. >> >> Sure, there are a few steps to get it all to gel - but once you enter a >> few lines (or if you prefer point-n-click) - you never have to worry >> about media working again (trust me, I used to keep a Windows box just >> to do the things I mentioned). >> >> Again - I'm talking about a desktop use. I have used Ubuntu server (both >> i386 and sparc) and FreeBSD is still my fav. however, Ubuntu (for >> installing LAMP) is nearly even w/FreeBSD. >> >> To me, apt-get is certainly cleaner and superior to >> portupgrade/portmanager. Perhaps someday either or will be as reliable >> as apt-get. >> >> Just my opinions of course. > > > Mine too, as far as ease-of-use goes. Ubuntu is a different kind > of Linux where they say up front that Linux is only a kernel; > that the rest is up to the real hackers, the app folks. My only > concern with Ubuntu is upgrading from my current 6.06 to 7.XX. > I can upgrade FBSD with one finger. Upgrading Ubuntu isn't > quite push-button. Not yet anyway. > > The last thing: I'll never trust my DNS server to anything > except the Berkeley distributions. > > and that's my dime's worth! > > gary
Gary - Not so - upgrading Ubuntu is pretty much a click. Have a look at this URL and you'll see 2 ways to upgrade http://onlyubuntu.blogspot.com/2007/03/upgrade-ubuntu-610-edgy-eft-to-ubuntu.html But in a nutshell - Ubuntu (Debian) is nothing more then editing a source file and 2 commands. apt-get update and apt-get dist-upgrade As to the comment about DNS - I agree 100% -- Best regards, Chris BOFH excuse #84: Someone is standing on the ethernet cable, causing a kink in the cable _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"